/
Navigation
Chronicles
Browse all articles
Explore
Semantic exploration
Research
Entity momentum
Nexus
Correlations & relationships
Story Arc
Topic evolution
Drift Map
Semantic trajectory animation
Posts
Analysis & commentary
Pulse API
Tech news intelligence API
Browse
Entities
Companies, people, products, technologies
Domains
Browse by publication source
Handles
Browse by social media handle
Detection
Concept Search
Semantic similarity search
High Impact Stories
Top coverage by position
Sentiment Analysis
Positive/negative coverage
Anomaly Detection
Unusual coverage patterns
Analysis
Rivalry Report
Compare two entities head-to-head
Semantic Pivots
Narrative discontinuities
Crisis Response
Event recovery patterns
Connected
Search: /
Command: ⌘K
Embeddings: large
TEXXR

Chronicles

The story behind the story

days · browse · Enter similar · o open

A Microsoft-led team of physicists retracts a widely-read 2018 paper on quantum computing, touted as a breakthrough, saying evidence was selectively presented

Wired Tom Simonite

Discussion

  • @mmoyr Michael Moyer on x
    In 2018, A Microsoft-backed team claimed to have found Majorana particles. Microsoft said the discovery would allow for a useful quantum computer within five years. Turns out the researchers left out key data. The paper has now been retracted: https://www.wired.com/...
  • @jimeharrisjr James Harris on x
    Before anyone piles on: 1) Everyone is capable of making this kind of mistake 2) This is how science is supposed to work; you find your evidence, peers review it, and if you are wrong, you admit it. https://www.wired.com/...
  • @wiredscience @wiredscience on x
    The 2018 report in Nature claimed to have found evidence of an elusive subatomic particle. A review found that the group had omitted key data. https://www.wired.com/...
  • @tsimonite Tom Simonite on x
    It's official: The 2018 Microsoft-backed physics paper claiming to have sighted Majorana particles—crucial to the company's quantum computing plans—has been retracted. Team admits selectively presenting data in Nature, but report says no intent to deceive. https://www.wired.com/.…